On Dec 14, 2009, at 11:12 AM, FERENC KOVACS wrote:
> Paola wrote: "I would be grateful for any additional analysis"
> The bottom line is suuumed up in this: "Now you see it, now you don't"
> Major premise: All humans are mortal.
> Minor premise: Some animals are human.
> Conclusion: Some animals are mortal.
> Major term: Predicate shows subject plus adjective Object1 with Property1
> Minor term: Predicate shows another subject with another adjective Object2
>with Property2 and NOT Object1
> Conclusion: Predicate shows another subject with adjective Object2 with
> Can you see the trick? (01)
I certainly can't. The major term in this syllogism is "mortal". The minor
term is "animals". Its form is "AII-1", a.k.a. "Darii" according to the
medieval mnemonic. On the simple standard semantics for categorical logic
wherein terms denote classes and categorical statements express relations
between them, all syllogisms of this form are demonstrably valid. You
obviously have some other sort of semantics in mind in which some kind of
"trick" is made manifest. Perhaps, if this semantics were made explicit, your
analysis would make sense. As it stands, it is a complete mystery. (02)
This is not a request to see your purported semantics, BTW. Proposals to
rework the semantics for logical frameworks that are literally thousands of
years old and completely understood are better sent to professional journals
for expert review than bandied about on a mailing list. In this case I'd
suggest JIR. (03)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (05)